WELL SAID, CM!!!! Hopefully the right-wing Japanese history revisionists and gbevers will pay attention to what you wrote.

I wasn’t debating on whether Kim-Gu was a terrorist or not, just on how Sperwer’s choice of words used to describe Kim-Gu depended on what your point of view was. He thinks Kim-Gu is a terrorist and many Koreans see him as a Freedom Fighter for the same actions that have given us this debate in the first place.

As Mcnut pointed out, insurgent is a kinder word for terrorist, therefore, making insurgent the PC word-of-the-day for terrorist. This is NOT a point of view. See the difference?

It all boils down to being the same shit, different pile. My point was that I wasn’t spouting politically-correct crap, but depending on who you were and your point of view, that Professor Karlsson (and Sperwer) have just as a legitimate point of view of who Kim-Gu was, as the Koreans who think of him as a hero. In this case, the Japanese have been outed from Korea and are the losers, so the Koreans, who are the winners, and (re)written their history, have determined that the “insurgent” Kim-Gu is now a freedom fighter.

If we were not celebrating this holiday today, and the Japanese were still in control of Korea, we wouldn’t even be having this debate. Kim-Gu wouldn’t even be under consideration as a ‘freedom fighter’ and Sperwer’s view of Kim-Gu as a terrorist would be correct– politically.

In order to judge whether Kim Ku et al was indeed a terrorist in the contemporary sense, it is necessary to have a close examination of the man’s life…which I highly doubt anyone here has done, judging by the comments.

I see you point, but this is assuming that Kim Gu is a known commodity in Japan. Also, there is a substantial number of Japanese who are not terribly proud of the colonial period. Find me a Korean who doesn’t view Kim Gu as a hero. (I just think that like the Dokdo “debate”, one side takes the issue a little more seriously than the other one does.)

In addition, your stance on collateral damage would only work if Kim Gu was running a regular army of a standing government; he was not. His organization was called “Imshi” government (temporary), and until it was recognized retroactively by the modern Korean government at its creation, it was not a standing government.

And are you talking about Jang Duk Su, when you say Kim Gu assassinated Donga Ilbo editor and democratic leader? I ask because Jang Duk Su had both jobs. Here, you’re pretty much spinning the historical fact for the sake of your argument. In other words, you’re just using speculations and rumors of the time as a stated historical fact, which, I must say, is very dishonest.

i guess in some peoples eyes they will always be freedom fighters

haha the freedom to chop of heads of anyone different than themselves

the freedom to stone people to death for lets say dishonoring the family

the freedom to plant bombs on subways during morning commutes

want more examples

To the Japanese, Kim Ku is a terrorist, to the Koreans, he’s a freedom fighter. It’s not PC, it’s just what people believe. Karlsson has not compromised his beliefs and he’s not afraid to state that opinion. He’s not sugar-coating the way he feels. Other people such as disagree with him, and that too is their right. Neither opinion is politically correct. You think Kin GU is a terrorist, and 50 million people think you’re full of shit. Go across the water, and all of a sudden millions of Japanese will suddenly have the same point of you as yourself, in which case your view will be the right one.

Calling a “terrorist” an “insurgent” is PC. Calling a terrorist a freedom fighter is a point of view.

go troll somewhere else. I think you have enough of that hot air stored up now to get the good ship Sperwer underway again.